Should the Baltic Germans be compensated by Russia?

[Vixen]

I say yes, but let them then compensate in return the ethnic Poles and Jews that they replaced when they moved to Poland.

There is nothing to stop them from also putting in a claim.

 

[Craig B]

There is nothing to stop them from also putting in a claim.

These victims are now unable to make a claim against the crusaders, unfortunately.

Old Prussians^WP resisted the Teutonic Knights, and received help from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania during the 13th century in their quest to free themselves of the military order ...

Because of the conquest of the Old Prussians by Germans, the Old Prussian language probably became extinct in the beginning of the 18th century with the devastation of the rural population by plagues and the assimilation of the nobility and the larger population with Germans or Lithuanians. However, translations of the Bible, Old Prussian poems, and some other texts survived and have enabled scholars to reconstruct the language.​

it was a Baltic language like Latvian or Lithuanian.

 

[Tolls]

This is still in living memory.

Barely.

And as was pointed out, they had their estates largely stripped before Stalin came along.

 

[Craig B]

It's like suggesting that everybody in the US of European descent move back to Europe and give the country back to the Native Americans. No one with any sense denys the Native Americans got a very raw deal and were screwed over royally but what is done is done.

Yes, but what's done isn't necessarily admirable. The situation is more like this: in consequence of the Indian Removal Act, the Cherokee people lost their lands and homes in Georgia. They were sent into exile in a wilderness. Should their descendants be compensated for that loss?

Some of the evicted Cherokee people owned slaves. Should they be compensated for loss of their slaves, where these were lost in the expulsion?

I would think probably not, because in modern times the ownership of slaves is not lawful. Feudal rights over land and the labour of serfs aren't now lawful either, so I can't see that the loss of such resources, even when their possession was lawful, should attract compensation from any modern government.

 

[Border Reiver]

Short answer - no.

Longer answer - Also no, but with some context. In order to claim "compensation" for an event there has to be a tortfeasor - ie. someone who has done the harm. SO what we need to do is determine who was the tortfeasor who stripped the Baltic German nobility of their estates, titles and privileges without compensation and then determine if those parties are still around to claim compensation from.

The Baltic States of Lativia and Estonia started the 20th century as part of the Russian Empire, were created as client states of Imperial Germany after the Russian Revolution, became independent states post Russian Civil War, were absorbed by the Soviet Union in 1940, went back to being client states (this time of Nazi Germany), were reabsorbed back into the Soviet Union and then broke off from the Soviet Union in 1992 to become independent states again.

Now, which government dispossessed the Baltic German nobility? That would be the independent states that existed from 1918 to 1940. Now the Estonian government managed to maintain a government in exile from 1940-1992, but the Latvians didn't. There is an argument to be made that a disposed Baltic German noble could claim compensation from the Estonian government for the seizing of an estate without compensation, but they are going to have an uphill battle - proving the former ownership of the estate in question, determining fair market value at the time of the confiscation, etc.

The Latvian Baltic Germans are just plain out of luck as there is no continuity of government there which could allow you to make a claim.

Asserting that Russia should pay compensation as the successor to the Soviet Union is equally fallacious - their government did not strip the Baltic Germans of their estates. They did ethnically cleanse them from the Baltic States post WWII - however the West German government accepted the post WWII borders and population movements well after WWII, so again, making a claim for ethnic cleansing is going to face a horde of legal challenges.

 

[Doubt]

Wrong. Erik the Holy brought Christianity to the Swedish empire and is now the patron saint of Stockholm.

Anyway we are not talking about the West Prussians, but the east ones.

Not wrong. Open a book or at least wikipedia:

"During the 13th century, the Old Prussians were conquered by the Teutonic Knights. The former German state of Prussia took its name from the Baltic Prussians, although it was led by Germans. The Teutonic Knights and their troops transferred Prussians from southern Prussia to northern Prussia. Many Old Prussians were also killed in crusades requested by Poland and the popes. Many were also assimilated and converted to Christianity. The old Prussian language was extinct by the 17th or early 18th century.[1] Many Old Prussians emigrated due to Teutonic crusades.[2] Old Prussians who emigrated to surrounding areas later returned."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Prussians

Swedish influence came later.

 

[ddt]

Old Prussian = Dead Prussian.

New Prussian = Failed Crusader that spoke German.

Someone cue Prokofiev's score for Alexander Nevsky...

Plus the movie itself. Its depiction of the Teutonic knights is, let's say, very suggestive.

 

[ddt]

I saw all that. It doesn't change the thrust of the OP.

You did realise the Swedish possession came to an end in 1721 by the Treaty of Nystad, and WWII was some >200 years later? In the interim, Russia did restore the privileges Charles X of Sweden had taken away. These privileges lasted until Stalin came along.

You saw that and still you decide to lie? Whatever happened before 1918 is irrelevant. Garrison's point is that the Latvian and Estonian governments expropriated those German nobles, so consequently, Stalin couldn't do that 20 years later.

For those not familiar with the MO of the OP, she
(1) more often than not makes a hash of history with wildly false claims (e.g.: all Jews who perished in the Holocaust were German citizens, and: it was legal for the Nazis to murder them).
(2) also has a habit to claim that her links support her claims, when, in fact, the text at the link contradicts it.

 

[theprestige]

(2) also has a habit to claim that her links support her claims, when, in fact, the text at the link contradicts it.

This is hands down my favorite part of fringe claims.

 

[Garrison]

I saw all that. It doesn't change the thrust of the OP.

The fact that you were completely wrong in claiming that Stalin and the USSR took away the Baltic Germans privileges and land doesn't affect your suggestion that Russia should compensate their heirs? That is utterly ludicrous, the facts render your entire 'thrust' moot and your determination to keep repeating what you now know to be untrue is perverse.

 

[Garrison]

For those not familiar with the MO of the OP, she
(1) more often than not makes a hash of history with wildly false claims (e.g.: all Jews who perished in the Holocaust were German citizens, and: it was legal for the Nazis to murder them).
(2) also has a habit to claim that her links support her claims, when, in fact, the text at the link contradicts it.

Are we sure this isn't Henri McPhee's long lost sibling?

 

[dudalb]

I say yes, but let them then compensate in return the ethnic Poles and Jews that they replaced when they moved to Poland.

It's like trying to unscramble eggs, at this point.
And the Poles have already been compensated, what was Germany east of the Elbe has been Polish since 1945/46. It's not a nice story.
Hitler said the war he started would decide the fate of Germany in the East for a thousand years;he was right, but not quite in the way he expected.

 

[dudalb]

Vixen has jumped the shark; I has a lot of sympathy with her Pro Finnish attiude...which I share;but she is now being ridiculous.

 

[dudalb]

Plus the movie itself. Its depiction of the Teutonic knights is, let's say, very suggestive.

Yeah, that the Knights helmets resemble the German "Coal Scuttle" helmet is just coincidence.
The battle of Lake Peipus, on the frozen lake, is one of the greatest battle scenes ever filmed.
FUn Story, Nevsky was released in 1938 to great acclaim; but was quietely withdrawn from circulation right after the Nazi Soviet pact, but then was rereleased in July of 1941, and was massively shown to Russian recruits...

 

[Vixen]

Barely.

And as was pointed out, they had their estates largely stripped before Stalin came along.

I am not sure that is correct.

 

[Vixen]

Short answer - no.

Longer answer - Also no, but with some context. In order to claim "compensation" for an event there has to be a tortfeasor - ie. someone who has done the harm. SO what we need to do is determine who was the tortfeasor who stripped the Baltic German nobility of their estates, titles and privileges without compensation and then determine if those parties are still around to claim compensation from.

The Baltic States of Lativia and Estonia started the 20th century as part of the Russian Empire, were created as client states of Imperial Germany after the Russian Revolution, became independent states post Russian Civil War, were absorbed by the Soviet Union in 1940, went back to being client states (this time of Nazi Germany), were reabsorbed back into the Soviet Union and then broke off from the Soviet Union in 1992 to become independent states again.

Now, which government dispossessed the Baltic German nobility? That would be the independent states that existed from 1918 to 1940. Now the Estonian government managed to maintain a government in exile from 1940-1992, but the Latvians didn't. There is an argument to be made that a disposed Baltic German noble could claim compensation from the Estonian government for the seizing of an estate without compensation, but they are going to have an uphill battle - proving the former ownership of the estate in question, determining fair market value at the time of the confiscation, etc.

The Latvian Baltic Germans are just plain out of luck as there is no continuity of government there which could allow you to make a claim.

Asserting that Russia should pay compensation as the successor to the Soviet Union is equally fallacious - their government did not strip the Baltic Germans of their estates. They did ethnically cleanse them from the Baltic States post WWII - however the West German government accepted the post WWII borders and population movements well after WWII, so again, making a claim for ethnic cleansing is going to face a horde of legal challenges.

Not really a claim for ethnic cleansing, more like bourgeois cleansing.

It was the Baltic Germans' land and culture for nigh on 800 years, they have a claim to it. You could call it their 'Isreal'.

 

[Border Reiver]

I am not sure that is correct.

We have the legislation from Estonia and Latvia dating from the 1920s expropriating the estates and we have the date that the USSR reabsorbed those same nations (1940).

What are you basing your doubt on?

 

[Vixen]

You saw that and still you decide to lie? Whatever happened before 1918 is irrelevant. Garrison's point is that the Latvian and Estonian governments expropriated those German nobles, so consequently, Stalin couldn't do that 20 years later.

For those not familiar with the MO of the OP, she
(1) more often than not makes a hash of history with wildly false claims (e.g.: all Jews who perished in the Holocaust were German citizens, and: it was legal for the Nazis to murder them).
(2) also has a habit to claim that her links support her claims, when, in fact, the text at the link contradicts it.

The operative word was 'largely'.

You didn't continue to read further, where it says:

Baltic German outlying estates were frequent targets of local Bolsheviks (as portrayed in the film, Coup de Grâce) and the combination of local Bolsheviks and nationalists following independence brought about land nationalisations and a displacement of Baltic Germans from positions of authority. Baltic Germans of Livonian Governorate found themselves in two new countries, both of which introduced sweeping agrarian reforms aimed at the large land owners, absolute majority of whom were Germans.

 

[Vixen]

The fact that you were completely wrong in claiming that Stalin and the USSR took away the Baltic Germans privileges and land doesn't affect your suggestion that Russia should compensate their heirs? That is utterly ludicrous, the facts render your entire 'thrust' moot and your determination to keep repeating what you now know to be untrue is perverse.

See above.

 

[Vixen]

Vixen has jumped the shark; I has a lot of sympathy with her Pro Finnish attiude...which I share;but she is now being ridiculous.

Why? The withdrawal of Russia brought about confiscation of Baltic German rights (the wiki piece says 'largely'). Stalin after the Bolsheviks took away even more. There is no anomaly. Garrison is just desperate to score a point so he scours the text looking for what he hopes are contradictions. Poor logical skills, indeed.